From: Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com>
To: Qian Cai <cai@lca.pw>, rppt@linux.ibm.com
Cc: Will Deacon <will.deacon@arm.com>,
akpm@linux-foundation.org, catalin.marinas@arm.com,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, mhocko@kernel.org,
linux-mm@kvack.org, vdavydov.dev@gmail.com, hannes@cmpxchg.org,
cgroups@vger.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH -next] arm64/mm: fix a bogus GFP flag in pgd_alloc()
Date: Tue, 11 Jun 2019 11:03:49 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20190611100348.GB26409@lakrids.cambridge.arm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1560187575.6132.70.camel@lca.pw>
On Mon, Jun 10, 2019 at 01:26:15PM -0400, Qian Cai wrote:
> On Mon, 2019-06-10 at 12:43 +0100, Will Deacon wrote:
> > On Tue, Jun 04, 2019 at 03:23:38PM +0100, Mark Rutland wrote:
> > > On Tue, Jun 04, 2019 at 10:00:36AM -0400, Qian Cai wrote:
> > > > The commit "arm64: switch to generic version of pte allocation"
> > > > introduced endless failures during boot like,
> > > >
> > > > kobject_add_internal failed for pgd_cache(285:chronyd.service) (error:
> > > > -2 parent: cgroup)
> > > >
> > > > It turns out __GFP_ACCOUNT is passed to kernel page table allocations
> > > > and then later memcg finds out those don't belong to any cgroup.
> > >
> > > Mike, I understood from [1] that this wasn't expected to be a problem,
> > > as the accounting should bypass kernel threads.
> > >
> > > Was that assumption wrong, or is something different happening here?
> > >
> > > >
> > > > backtrace:
> > > > kobject_add_internal
> > > > kobject_init_and_add
> > > > sysfs_slab_add+0x1a8
> > > > __kmem_cache_create
> > > > create_cache
> > > > memcg_create_kmem_cache
> > > > memcg_kmem_cache_create_func
> > > > process_one_work
> > > > worker_thread
> > > > kthread
> > > >
> > > > Signed-off-by: Qian Cai <cai@lca.pw>
> > > > ---
> > > > arch/arm64/mm/pgd.c | 2 +-
> > > > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
> > > >
> > > > diff --git a/arch/arm64/mm/pgd.c b/arch/arm64/mm/pgd.c
> > > > index 769516cb6677..53c48f5c8765 100644
> > > > --- a/arch/arm64/mm/pgd.c
> > > > +++ b/arch/arm64/mm/pgd.c
> > > > @@ -38,7 +38,7 @@ pgd_t *pgd_alloc(struct mm_struct *mm)
> > > > if (PGD_SIZE == PAGE_SIZE)
> > > > return (pgd_t *)__get_free_page(gfp);
> > > > else
> > > > - return kmem_cache_alloc(pgd_cache, gfp);
> > > > + return kmem_cache_alloc(pgd_cache, GFP_PGTABLE_KERNEL);
> > >
> > > This is used to allocate PGDs for both user and kernel pagetables (e.g.
> > > for the efi runtime services), so while this may fix the regression, I'm
> > > not sure it's the right fix.
> > >
> > > Do we need a separate pgd_alloc_kernel()?
> >
> > So can I take the above for -rc5, or is somebody else working on a different
> > fix to implement pgd_alloc_kernel()?
>
> The offensive commit "arm64: switch to generic version of pte allocation" is not
> yet in the mainline, but only in the Andrew's tree and linux-next, and I doubt
> Andrew will push this out any time sooner given it is broken.
I'd assumed that Mike would respin these patches to implement and use
pgd_alloc_kernel() (or take gfp flags) and the updated patches would
replace these in akpm's tree.
Mike, could you confirm what your plan is? I'm happy to review/test
updated patches for arm64.
Thanks,
Mark.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2019-06-11 10:03 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 20+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2019-06-04 14:00 [PATCH -next] arm64/mm: fix a bogus GFP flag in pgd_alloc() Qian Cai
2019-06-04 14:23 ` Mark Rutland
2019-06-04 14:30 ` Mark Rutland
2019-06-05 21:33 ` Mike Rapoport
2019-06-04 14:54 ` Mike Rapoport
2019-06-10 11:43 ` Will Deacon
2019-06-10 17:26 ` Qian Cai
2019-06-11 10:03 ` Mark Rutland [this message]
2019-06-11 12:41 ` Mike Rapoport
2019-06-11 12:46 ` Qian Cai
2019-06-12 6:57 ` Mike Rapoport
2019-06-12 18:35 ` Qian Cai
2019-06-11 13:02 ` Mark Rutland
2019-06-13 12:11 ` Mike Rapoport
2019-06-13 13:22 ` Qian Cai
2019-06-13 19:44 ` Mike Rapoport
2019-06-17 15:12 ` Mike Rapoport
2019-06-17 16:36 ` Will Deacon
2019-06-18 6:12 ` Mike Rapoport
2019-06-18 6:54 ` Will Deacon
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20190611100348.GB26409@lakrids.cambridge.arm.com \
--to=mark.rutland@arm.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=cai@lca.pw \
--cc=catalin.marinas@arm.com \
--cc=cgroups@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=hannes@cmpxchg.org \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=mhocko@kernel.org \
--cc=rppt@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=vdavydov.dev@gmail.com \
--cc=will.deacon@arm.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).